E 473 
.772 
.P841 
Copy 1 






/ 

/ 




li 



- GEN'L FITZ JOHN PORTER'S 

REPLY 



Y "•"^ TO 



HON. Z. CHANDLER'S 

SPEECH 

IN THE U. S. SENATE, FEB. 21, 1870. 



MORRISTOWN, N. J 
1870. 




■17 I 

rFHt 



MoRRisTOWN, ]Sr. J., March, 1870. 
Hon. Z. Chandler, U. S. Senate: 

Sir — You introduced a resolution in the Senate of the United 
States, on the twenty-first February, " Requesting the Presi. 
.dent to communicate to the Senate, if not inconsistent with 
the public interests, any recent correspondence in his possession 
in relation to the case of Fitz John Porter." 

On the occasion of oifering the resolution you delivered a 
speech which has gone into the public debates and been pub- 
lished, and which will ever remain on the record as the expres- 
sion of the opinion of a Senator of the United States, not only 
on the impropriety and injustice of according to me a re-hear- 
ing — but on the justice of my sentence, even in the light of the 
new facts Avhich I propose to bring before any tribunal the 
President may appoint to re-hear the case. 

Though you withdiow your resolution immediately after 
making your speech, the latter remains unanswered except by 
the generous words of the Hon. Henry Wilson, the chairman of 
the senate committee of military affairs during the whole war 
and since, who declared that he adhered to his formerly ex- 
pressed opinion, that my case was, under the new evidence 
brought to light, a proper one to be re-heard. Indeed the with- 
drawal of your resolution was more prejudicial to me than the 
original offering of it ; for if not withdrawn, the correspondence 
called for would have shown in a great measure the truth, and 
my title to a re-heai-ing. 

It is a noble and a senatorial office, " to vindicate the truth 
of history," and you assured the Senate and the country that 
that was the object of your speech. 

May I not ask, that you will read this, my letter to you, 
which is intended to show that you fell into grave errors in your 
endeavor to do justice to history. May I not also ask — as your 
inculpation of me — while I was appealing for a re-hearing of 
my case on new evidence, w^as presented for the public consid- 



eration in a speech from your seat in the Senate, and is thus 
preserved for ever in the printed debates — that you will, by some 
means familiar to you as a Senator, secure to me, the accused in 
that speech, the presentation and preservation of my defence 
and answer, in as advantageous a manner and in as desirable a 
form. This will vindicate the truth of history in the only way 
that it can be vindicated with justice to me — the accused. 
I pray you to do me this justice. 

In your speech you say that Mr. Lincoln, Mr. Stanton, and 
Gen. Wadsworth, who knew the facts, are noAV dead. They 
could not know them. They were not the witnesses. They 
could only know or believe what was told them. But if you 
mean that I have waited their death to make my appeal, you are 
greatly in error. I have made it from tlie first hour of the ver- 
dict, with constant urgency and all the force I could exert ; and 
I have the proof that Mr. Lincoln, within a short period of his 
death, promised to re-open the case if new evidence was pro- 
duced, and said — what some of the ablest and truest friends of 
his administration now say, among them some of your brother 
senators — that, in such case, a rehearing was not only just to 
me but due to the honor of the army. 

I have also the further proof that Mr. Lincoln said that he 
had entertained a very high opinion of my bravery and fidelity, 
but had been obliged in this particular case, to form his opinion 
and base his action on the Judge-Advocate General's review, as 
in the multitude of his cares he had not been able to make a 
personal investigation. 

I have also had very gratifying evidence, since the trial, of 
Gen. Wadsworth's friendship and confidence. You relate the 
opinion he expressed to you of the great and decisive result of 
the battle of Malvern. You will pardon me for asking you to 
remember also in what terms the commanding general assigned 
to me the chief merit of that great day. 

I need not go into that half oi your speech which is a com- 
mendation of General Pope. It would draw me from the proj^er 
line of my own defence. Much of what you say of him, I am 
not interested to deny. If he was put at the head of an army 
to rescue McClellan by the means you suggest — by "fool- 
ing correspondents," " fooling the country," and " fooling 



the rebels" vnih stones of his great force, I need not deny that 
he was the man for that part, although he did not " fool the re- 
bels" (as he admits), whatever success in that business he had 
with others ; and I may think it was somewhat in excess of any 
useful demand the government liad on his peculiar gift, to prac- 
tice as he did on the good nature of Mr. Lincoln, and attempt 
to fool hiin with despatches of " great victories," of " driving 
the enemy from the field," " making great captures," &c., &c. 
But that is his affair, not mine. I think you are much in error 
about it. But I prefer to leave it so, and go on to my own 
business. 

Stripped of all accessories by which they have been covered 
I present the charges on wliich I was arraigned, and my claims 
for a re-hearing. 

The first accusation against me is that I disobeyed an order 
of Gen. Pope received at Warrenton Junction about 10 at night 
August 27, '62, directing me to march my command at 1 
o'clock in the morning to Bristoe station, ten miles distant, so 
as to be there by daylight. You have added to this charge that 
Hooker was out of ammunition, and might have been destroyed 
by not getting it from me. 

The disobedience claimed consists in not marching till 3 
o'clock in the morning — a delay of two hours. 

I shall prove — when I get a re-heai"ing — that I put off start- 
ing — two hours only of night — by the urgent advice of the 
generals of division. Their reasons were the following : 

That my command had reached Warrenton Junction at a late 
hour, without food, and very much fatigued by a long and difii- 
cult march, the last of thirteen days and nights of marching and 
broken rest ; that the night was pitch dark, the road was bad 
and blocked up with wagon trains in considerable confusion : 

That the spirit and purpose of the order would be 
best carried out by delaying the march till dayhreaJc, be- 
cause the troops would have their night's rest, and would make 
the march with more rapidity and fewer delays, and reach 
their destination in condition for immediate action ; and, 

That as we were informed " the enemy was then retiring" 
from before Gen. Pope, the necessity was not pressing, and as my 
command would be required to aid in "driving him from Manassas 



and clearing the country between that and Gainesville" the troops 
already worn out and needing rest and sleep, if required to re- 
new the march at an earlier hour than day-break, would be dis- 
abled for the service several miles beyond Bristoe. 

I shall i^rove that, though appreciating the soundness 
of their reasons, I was decidedly of the opinion that 
" the order should be obeyed ;" that " he who gave the 
order knew whether the necessities of the case should warrant 
the exertions that had to be made to comply with it," and 
that I yielded to the advice of my Generals only after being 
assured that the bearer of the order had been delayed by 
the darkness of the night and the blocked condition of the 
road. 

I shall prove that the result showed that literal compliance 
with the order was impracticable, that no time was lost by the 
delay, but the march made all the quicker for it; and that I 
arrived as soon as other troops, commanded by as true soldiers 
as ever breathed, coming a shorter distance and under as urgent 
orders. 

I shall prove that when I did arrive, there Avas and had been 
nothing for me to do, and that I remained at Bristoe all that 
day, imder injunctions from Gen. Pope, twice repeated through 
the day, " to remain at Bristoe, when wanted you will be sent 
for." 

I shall prove also, that I knew nothing about Hooker want- 
ing ammunition, and that he did not want any, and did not 
take any vhen it reached him. 

In brief: — I shall prove this charge of Pope's not only false, 
but frivolous and only suggested as a make weight to the far 
more serious accusations arising from the transactions of the 
next day. 

New proof is ready on all these points. 

The events of the 2Vth and 28th of August being thus briefly 
given and my conduct on those days narrated, I am brought to 
the events of the 29th. 

On the morning of that day the following order — known as 
the "joint order" was issued by Gen. Pope. — 



Headquarters Army of Virginia, ) 

Centreville, August 29, 1862. ) 
Generals McDowell and Porter. 

" You will please move forward with your joint commands toward Gainesville. 
I sent General Porter written orders to that effect an hour and a half ago. 
Heintzelman, Sigel and Reno are moving on Warrenton turnpike, and must 
now be not far from Gainesville. I desire that as socm as co'mmunication is 
established between this force and j-our own, the whole command shall halt. 
It may be necessary to fall back behind Bull Run, at Centreville to night. 
I presume it will be so on account of our supplies. 

" I have sent no orders of any description to Ricketts, and none to interfere 
in any way with the movements of McDowell's troops, except what I sent by 
his aide de camp last night, which were to hold his position on the Warren- 
ton pike until the troops from here should fall on the enemy's flank and rear. 
I do not even know Rickett's position, as I have not been able to find out 
where General McDowell was until a late hour this morning. General Me 
Dowell will take immediate steps to communicate with General Ricketts- 
and instruct him to join the other divisions of his corps as soon as practica- 
ble. 

" If atiy considerable advintages are to be gained by departing from this ordtr, 
it will not be strictly carried ont. One thing must be held in view, that the 
troops must occupy a position from which they can reach Bull Run to-night 
or by morning. 

" The indications aie that the whole force of the enemy is moving in this 
direction at a pace that will bring them here by to morrow night or the 
next day. 

" My own headquarters will for the present be with Ileintzelman's corps, or 
at this place. 

" John Pope, Major-General Commanding." 

The accusation is that I disobeyed this order. You charge 
" inaction " under it. 

The record shows it to have been a substitute for a previous 
order from Gen. Pope to me; that when I received it I was moving 
along the Manassas road and upon Gainesville, having my own 
corps (less than 11,000) and King's division of McDowell's 
corps and that my purpose was to prevent the junction of 
Longstreet with Jackson — that event having been made im- 
minent by the withdrawal of the troops of Ricketts and King 
from the road the enemy would have to traverse. 

The "joint order" was instigated principally by a note from 
me to Gen. Pope, asking for written orders to take the place 
of contradictory verbal orders, which I had received from him, 
and giving him information I had obtained from various sources. 

The terms of the "joint order" show that Gen. Pope in- 
tended to form his army in front of or near Gainesville, in order 
that he might be prepared to fall back " behind Bull Run that 
night or next morning"; that McDowell and myself were 
merely ordered to advance far enough to communicate with the 



6 

rest of the army and then halt, and on no account to advance 
so far that we could not fall back to Bull Run by mornmg 
at least, or as the order says, " the troops must occupy a posi- 
tion from which they can reach Bull Run to-night or by morn- 
ing." It contemplated no offensive combat, beyond that nec- 
essary to effect the communication with the rest of the army. 

The record shoAvs that Pope's statement in the "joint order" 
that the troops under Heintzleman, Sigel and Reno, were " mov- 
ing on Warrenton turnpike and must now be not far from 
Gainesville," was wrong. They were all near Groveton, four 
miles distant from Gainesville, and were arrested by Jackson's 
troops. 

About noon Gen. McDowell appeared, and showing me the 
"joint order," took command. Prior to its receipt, I had been 
moving toioard Gainesville, and, at the time of its receipt, had 
come in contact toith the enemy, and vms coming into positioti, 
when McDowell appeared — the rear of my column being near 
the junction of the Manassas and Sudley Spring roads. 

Gen. McDowell testified that "When the 'joint order' 
reached us we were doing what that joint order directed us to 
do. That joint order found the troops in the position it di- 
rected them to be." It seems clear, therefore, that up to noon, 
29th, according to Gen. McDowell, both he and I, Avere faith- 
fully doing as we had been directed, and that our action, (not 
" m-action") fulfilled Gen. Pope's order to us jointly. 

I had ample reason to believe, then (noon 29th) that Long- 
street's forces had formed their Junction with Jackson. I sub- 
mitted proof upon my trial, to sustain an assertion so vitally 
important to me. My assertion Avas contradicted, my proof was 
disbelieved, and the court coinciding Avitli Pope's " assertion," 
McDowell's " belief," and Judge Advocate Holt's " assump- 
tion " of Longstreet's force being far distant from me, held me 
responsible and guilty. 

When I shall show, by Longstreet's own testimony, how cruel 
a wrong this mass of bold assertion, Avrong belief, and preju- 
diced assumption has done me, Avhat just man can gainsay my 
right to be heard f 

The record shows that after discussion of the injunctions in 
the "joint order" and in exercise of the discretion given in it — 
" that if any considerable advantages are to be gained by de- 



parting from this order, it will not be strictly carried out "— 
Gen. McDowell, still in command, decided to withdraw from 
my column his portion of the troops (over one-half) and gave 
me a verbal order, about Avhich there is a dispute. He testifies 
the question was not one of " advance," and that he ordered 
me " to 2^ost my troops in to the right of the head of the 
" column of \chere I then was,'''' " to put my troops in there.'''' 

The record further shows that two officers testify that they 
heard Gen. McDowell say to me when he first joined me at the 
head of the column and I had come in contact with the enemy, 
" Porter you are too far out ; this is no place to fight a 
battle." 

I have asserted and ever shall assert, that Gen. McDowell's 
order to me was " to remain where I then was, while he would 
" place King's division on my right and form the connection 
"enjoined in the 'joint order.'" This order to me and state- 
m.ent of what he himself was about to do, were intended to ac- 
complish a purpose very much desired by Gen. McDowell. The 
assignment of King to me annoyed him, and he had previously 
obtained from me, while at Manassas, a promise that I would 
place King on my right in the new line about to be formed, 
so that connecting with Reynolds (then at Groveton) his 
(McDowell's) troops would be together and at the proper time, 
he might reclaim King. Gen. McDowell by the above order 
and statement undertook to discharge me from my promise and 
to do himself what he desired — have King with him. 

An immediate examination by us of the country towards 
Groveton, showed the impracticability of doing directly what 
he desired, " placing King on my right and thus forming con- 
nection with the troops near Groveton" — and Gen. McDowell 
left me without further instruction, but with the understanding 
that he would, by going (iround behind the woods sej^arating 
us from Groveton, take King and uniting Ricketts with him, 
join his command (Reynolds and Sigel) then at Groveton, 

While returning to my command, seeing the enemy forming in 
our front, I determined to attack at once with our combined 
forces and sent my chief of stafi" to King's division to prevent its 
withdrawal, resuming at the same time the deployment of 
my troops, arrested by McDowell. 



8 

My chief of staiF soon returned bringing from Gen. McDowell 
the message for me " to remain where I was, and if compelled 
" to fall back to do so on his left." He had found McDowell 
with King's division. I could then regard this message only 
as the renewal of McDowell's first injunction, not now, in 
the face of a superior force, to be disregarded — and at once 
recalled my troops to the position they held when he left me. 
From that time till the receipt of an order dated 4:30 P. M., 
my troops held virtually the same position, changes only having 
been made to induce attack upon us, or by threatening attack, 
to keep the enemy from going against Gen. Pope. In this I 
was successful. 

As Gen. McDowell's order to me at that time alone prevented 
an immediate engagement of my troops, and resulted in pro- 
longing the " inaction " which you condemn in me, I deem it 
proper to state these facts fully. 

I was a witness before the court of inquiry relative to Gen. 
McDowell's conduct, which was in session at the same time and 
in the same building with my court ; but was prohibited fi-om 
giving this statement in full and explaining " wherein my state- 
ment differed from his testimony before inj court." Gen. 
McDowell was informed by the court that, thougli I could not 
make this explanation without a change of his question, he 
should have liberty to change his question to bring out the 
facts. This he declined to do and my mouth was consequently 
closed. 

It is true Gen. McDowell testified to a " want of memory " 
of any such verbal order sent to me — and had himself endorsed 
only by the testimony of an oflicer, who was presented to the 
court as a witness against me, though a member of that 
name court in which he was sitting judicially ! whose 
testimony was that he was not present wlien such an order was 
given. 

Against Gen. McDowell's want of recollection and the 
endorsement it had, I produced tlic positive testimony of my 
chief of stafi', who brought me McDowell's renewed order ; and 
I am now prepared to verify his testimony by additional and 
conclusive evidence. 

I have sliown that my "inaction" up to the afternoon of the 
29th was in strict obedience of ord^'s. 



I now meet your charge of " inaction " up to a later hour on 
that clay. 

After Gen. McDowell left me (early afternoon, 29th) and 
up to the time of Gen. Pope's positive order of 4. 30 P. M. (29th) 
reaching me, 6:30 P, M., I was certainly as free to exercise my 
" discretion" under Pope's "joint order" as McDowell Avas. 
Under the "joint order" he elected to divide our forces and 
march to another field, where it seems he arrived too late for 
his troops to be successfully used. Under it I elected to hold 
my position, neutralize double my force, and, in the enemy's 
opinion, saved, by my action, both Pope and McDowell from 
" capture or total route." I submit to you, sir, if I can prove 
all this, as I can, whether my conduct " within a short distance 
of the field of battle under the sound of our guns," and iclthout 
" an order to go into the fight," was not most advantageous 
to our army and the country. 

It is now proper to introduce the subject of the new evidence 
I am ready to produce on these points, and which is indicated in 
the letters of Generals Longstreet, Wilcox and others. The 
orders of General Pope on the 29th were based upon the sup- 
position that the " whole force of the enemy " was still some 
distance from the field and would not arrive within thirty to 
fifty hours, i. e. " by to-morrow night or the next day." This 
basis of the order was, to my knowledge and that of Gen. Mc- 
Dowell, untrue. I had come in contact with the enemy and 
was coming into position Avhen the order was received. I knew 
that Longstreet had arrived, and I was convinced, from in- 
formation in my possession, that the remainder of the enemy's 
main forces must be near the field, and observation satisfied me 
they were arriving. 

The letters above referred to, state that Longstreet's com- 
mand commenced arriving on the field at 9 A. M., 29th — about 
the hour Pope's order was penned — that he was ready to 
receive any attack after 11, and that he M^as particularly anx- 
ious to bring on the battle after 1 2 M. 

This additional evidence also shows, as I claimed at the 
time, that an attack at any time after 12 M.,by my corps alone, 
must have resulted disastrously, and that the mere fact of my 
presence on the Gainesville road kept a largely superior force of 



• 10 

the enemy in my front, and diverted them from supporting 
Jackson and overwhelming Pope. 

I am not calling in question the propriety of Gen. McDowell's 
movements of the 29th. I am merely sustaining my views of 
the case as claimed at the time, and I ask you, sir, is it not now 
demonstrated beyond doubt that the very order which McDow- 
ell could not recollect, " to remain whei-e I was" — was the one 
of all others for him to give. There can be no dispute among 
military men on this point. 

To show that my views are in no wise changed and that 
I now raise no new issue, I quote from my defence before the 
court. 

" I come now to say a few words of the testimony of General McDowell. I 
"shall sp"iik of liim as a witness with entire calmness and candor, because, 
" though I speak with regret, I shall speak with no disrespect. His testi- 
" mony, taken as a whole, has astonished me beyond measure. I feel that it 
" has done me more harm and more wrong — I cliaritably hoj)e unintentional 
"wrong — than has been done to me by all the rest of the testimony of the 
" prosecution put together." 

"It is well that this alleged order, 'to put my troops in there,' to me l^y 
" General McDowell does not so appear charged as speciried, for now I will 
" demonstrate that he did not then give rue, and cannot be believed to have 
" given me, any such order." * * * " It would have been proclaimed forth- 
" with at the head quarters of General Pope ; it wotild have been blazoned among 
" these charges and specitications side by side with the order it.self, and, if true, 
" it ought to iiave made the words of exculpation which General Pupe uttered to 
" mo at Fairfax Court House on the 2d September, four days afterwards, choke 
" him as he spoke. But it is not true tiiat General McDowell then, or at any 
" time on that day, gave me any such order ' to put my troops in there,' or to 
" do anj'thing of the kind ; and fortunate is it for General McDowell that it is 
" not true, for if he had given nic any such mandate to thrust my corps in over 
" th.'t broken ground between Jackson's right and tlie separate enetny massing 
" in my front, the danger rnd disaster of such a movement would have been 
" then and now upon his hands. I am glad that I can say that Gen. McDowell 
" is utterly in error upon this point, and is no way chargeable with such fatal 
" military bhinder. It is not alone that I am as clear as I can be as to any 
" fact in my life that I received at that time no such order from him, but it is 
"demonstrated in what I have said, as well as in wliat else stands proved in 
" this record, that no such order to me could have been then by him given. 

" Unable, as he testifies, by habit of mind accurately to remember the divi- 
" sions of time, he has plainly confused in his testimonj', * * * 

" the siluati(jns, the sayings, and the doings of different days. I have said 
" that I would speak of his testimony with calmness and candor, and without 
" disrespect. Under strong provocations I have kept my word, but I have 
" demolished iiis testimony before yim. and with it the whole prosecution falls, 
«' and the accusHtion is left to the condemnation and derision of all just men." 

This narrative covers tlie period of time between noon of 
the 29th and the hour of receipt of Pope's order of 4:30 P. M. 

You repeat Gen. Pope's main charge : that I failed to make, 



11 

under his order of 4:30 P. M., August 29, an attack which would 
have caused " the defeat and capture of JachsorCs army.'''' 

That order was : — 

" Headquauters in the Field, 

"■ Ancimt 29, 1802—4.30 F. M. 
"Your line of mnrcli brings you in on the enemy's riglit flank. I desire you 
" to ])usli forward into action at once on the enemy's flank, and, if possible, 
" on liis rear, keejiing your right in communication with Gen. lleynolds. Tlie 
" enemy is massed in the woods in front of us, but can be shelled out as soon 
"as you engiige their flank. Keep heavv reserves, and use your batteries, 
"keeping well closed to your right all the time. In case you are obliged to fall 
" back, do so to your riglit and rear, so as to keep in close communication with 
" the right wing. 

" JOHN POPE, 
" Major General Commandhic/." 

The evidence given on the trial shows very clearly that this 
order was not delivered to me until about 6:30 P. M., about 
sunset ; that the orders to carry it into execution were at once 
given by me and attended to in person ; that the preparations 
eould not be completed in season to make the attack before 
dark, and that the nature of the ground was such as to make a 
night attack impracticable. My witnesses as to the hour of tlie 
receipt of the order (about 6:30) were Gen. Sykes, Col, Locke, 
Capt. Montieth and Lieutenants Weld and Ingham, Against 
these officers, then as now widely known and respected, Gen. 
Pope was able to introduce only the testimony of his relative 
who brought the order, and the orderly who came Avith him. 
On the receipt of this oi'der, I gave, as was my duty, a icritten 
ackno%ded(jment to the officer bearing it. He verifies this fact, 
and yet Gen, Pope, wdien called upon in court to produce it and 
thus establish the vital point of the time of his order reaching 
me, could not find it. So also of several other letters of im- 
portance against him and in my favor. 

When Gen. Pope made this charge, to put on me the blame of 
his defeat, he little thought I should ever have the proofs I n^w 
have, and which he and others now labor so hard to ex- 
clude from the case. He has made many vain boasts; but 
none more wild and exti^avagant, Avith less of truth and sense 
than this charge made against me, which he attempts, now as 
then, to sustain only by such reckless assertions as the following : 

" I believe, in fact, I am positive, that at 5 o'clock in the afternoon of the 
" 29th, Gen. Porter had in his front, no considerable body of the enemy ; 



12 

" I believed then, as I am very sure now, that it was easily practicable for him 
" to have turned the rij^ht flank of Jackson and to have fallen upon his rear; 
" that if he had done so, we should have gained a decisive victory over the 
" army under Jackson before he could have been joined by any of the forces of 
" Lojiffstreet; and that the army of Gen. Lee would have been so crippled and 
" checked by the destruction of this large force as to have been no longer in 
" condition to prosecute further operations of an aggressive character." 

On this " emphatic opinion," says Judge Advocate-General 
Holt, " coincided in by McDowell and Roberts," I was con- 
demned. 

McDowell, under the same theory in regard to the com- 
mander and strength of the enemy fronting me, testifies if I had 
attacked the right wing of the enemy (Jackson) on the 29th, the 
result would " have been decisive in our favor." 

Though I then knew it I had not other witnesses than my- 
self to prove that it was not Jackson'^ isolated corps alone 
before us, but Lee's whole army ; and that for me to have at- 
tacked Jackson's flank was impossible, as Lee's whole army lay 
between Jackson and me and would probably have led to Pope's 
capture, not possibly to Jackson's — to our total rout, not to the 
enemy's defeat. 

To i^rove this, new testimony is now attainable, and on this I 
am entitled to a new hearing. 

My opinions then (29th) were the same as they are now — and 
I quote once more from my defence pointing to the fact : 

" If the major general, late commanding the army of Virginia, whose in- 
" spector general is, at least, my nominal prosecutor here, doubts the truth of 
" what I now say, let him produce, if he can, as I asked him to produce at the 
" trial, the note which I sent him by Captain Douglass Pope, at dusk, in reply 
" to his order of 4. BO P. M , of the 27tli, directing me to attack Jackson's rigtit, 
" and he will then learn, or at least recollect, what I at that moment judged 
" concerning both the position of the enemy and my own. Let him publish 
" that note, since it has not been produced, if he can, even at this late day, find 
"it, and then all who choose to compare that note with what I have just stated, 
' will know that the military theory of the position which I now express with 
" all confidence has cvlt since that day remained in my mind unchangea." 

The next day gave sad proof in my justification — though 
the prosecution managed to exclude the evidence from the trial, 
and that alone would be ground for a new trial. The facts are 
these: on that day — the 30th August — Pope withdrew me from 
before Longstreet, collected all his force on Jackson, attacked, 
and was defeated. My corps fought well, and suflered gi-eat 
loss. In Jackson's report to Lee he speaks of our attack ; of 
the " fierce and sanguinary struggle ;" the " fury of the as- 



13 

sault ;" the " impetuous and well sustained onsets." But Pope 
being again defeated, again blames me and my corps. In his 
report he says : " the attack of Porter was neither vigorous nor 
persistent ; and his troops soon retired in considerable confu- 
sion."" The charge sent to the court martial imputes to me, 
" slowness " — " falling back " — " drawing away " — and " not 
making the resistance demanded by his position." I was not 
allowed to acquit myself, and convict him. For lohen the trial 
came on, the prosecution loithdrew the charge, and prevailed 
with the court, over my earnest protest, to admit no evidence 
of the facts on that day, to explain the transactions and prove 
the situation of the day before. It was a cunning and most un- 
fair proceeding, and a false technical quibble to shut out my 
most material proof, and now Pope denies that Jackson's re- 
port refers to me, and my men. He says, " Porter is deceived." 
I say I am not deceived ; and that he does not speak the truth. 
I challenge the proof before any honest tribunal. 

The situation on both days was simply this. It was now the 
crisis of the campaign. Pope's " fooling " had all failed. The 
" stories " he put out — which you think so skillful — had not 
" fooled " the rebels. They knew the truth — preferring to get 
it elsewhere — and had come with a superior force to give him 
battle. The stratagem they practiced had no foolery in it. It 
was the old maxim of war, " take position when you can, and 
induce the attack f skilful tactics, which the book of regu- 
lations for our army thus expounds, in the chapter on battles : 
" to be safe in making the attack, requires a larger force than 
" the enemy, or better troops and favorable ground ; " and, 
" when the ai'tillery can be well posted, and advantage of 
" ground secured, await the enemy and compel him to attack." 
Pope's braggart temper and utter want of military penetration 
let him fall into the trap, and he made the unfortunate attacks 
the enemy wanted him to make. Here is his own account. On 
the 30th of August at 5:30 A. M. he telegraphed Halleck 
of the battle of the 29th, "we have fought a terrific battle; 
" the enemy was driven from the field ; we have lost 
" 8,000 men. From the appearance of the field, the en- 
" emy has lost at least two to one. He stood strictly on 
"the defensive, and eveiy assault was made by us." Jackson 
reported that "every advance was most successfully driven 



14 

" back." Of the next day's battle, Pope says, " I advanced 
" to the attack as rapidly- as I was able to bring my forces into 
"action." To his army, he said, '■'■you loill pursue the enemy 
'■'■in his retreat., and press him vigorously all the dayy Every 
one knows the deplorable result, and such were the tactics 
that led to it. But Pope never wants facts and reasons to ex- 
cuse himself. lie generally has a variet)^ and no two hold 
together. In this case he has an assortment. 

/« Aw rg/x>r#, dated January 27, 1863, he says, "atnotinle 
" could I have fought a successful battle with the immensely su- 
" perior force of the enemy which confronted me, and which was 
" able, at any time, to outflank me and bear my small army to 
"the dust." 

To the court martial he declared that if I had not failed him, 
he would have " defeated and captured Jackson's army on the 
29th, and have beaten and destroyed Longstreet and Lee in 
detail as tliey came up afterwards." The truth is Lee and 
Longstreet were with Jackson already, and of this we now have 
the fullest proof. 

If this seems to you to be going somewhat into Pope's history 
I desire you to consider that it adheres strictly to the charge 
against me, and my proper and true defence to it ; and it has 
the most direct bearing on the case to add, that if Pope beli(n'ed 
the charges, if lie had any honest belief or reasonable suspicion 
of their truth — that " I failed him," and caused his defeat and 
the escape of liis enemy — it Avas his duty to prefer the charges 
not that of his Inspector General. In that case I could only be 
tried by a court detailed by the President. The law says when the 
general who commands, &c., "shall be the accuser or prose- 
cutor," the court shall be detailed by the President. Pope 
was surely the accuser. He brought the accusation in his 
ofticial report. A military commission was first ordered on his 
charges. He was the principal witness for the prosecution. 
He testified to the committee on the conduct of the war, that 
he "brought me to justice." Then surely a trial, in which 
his part as accuser was disavowed, and the charges got up were 
signed by his staff ofBcer Gen. Benjamin S. Roberts, was a fraud 
on me and on the law,.tainting the proceeding that grew out 
of it, and whi<ih vitiates and annuls it: 

On that ground, too, I am entitled to a new hearing. 



15 

You, sir, may ask why now, I have to offer so much new evi- 
dence wliich should have been attainable at the time from our 
own ranks ? 

I reply that it was not obtainable, for the following reasons : — 

1st. That, the times and circumstances checked a free ex- 
pression or offering of testimony. 

2d. That permission was refused me by the Secretary of War, 
early in the trial, to send my aids to the army at Fredericks- 
burg, to see witnesses and gather testimony. 

3d. That when I did send, on my own responsibility, my aids 
to the army, letters to and from them and others, were pur- 
loined or opened and robbed of information. 

4th. Some witnesses I was persuaded could furnish reliable 
information in my favor, but of their names and location I was 
not apprised and others, whom I knew would testify to 
very important facts in my behalf, did not appear till the 
moment they were called to testify. 

In the former case I, of course, lost not only the benefit of 
their testimony but also the benefit of - the information they 
had as to what other persons could prove in my favor. In the 
latter case I was compelled to produce witnesses without 
knowing myself, or my counsel knowing, what particular facts 
they were possessed of and how to elicit them fully. These 
witnesses, whose names I had, were all given at the opening of 
the court on the demand of Judge- Advocate Holt and on his as- 
surance that he would secure their early attendance. 

Of these irregularities I complained to the court, and to the 
government. They give additional grounds for a rehearing. 

You have been misled enough against me, to believe and re- 
peat what Pope says. To my offer of proof of the enemy's 
strength in numbers and position, he objects — tliat I had 
nothing to do icith it. I urns ordered to attack. It was my 
duty to attach if I lost every man I had., and no tnatter 'whe- 
ther the enemy was 20,000 or 100,000. 

To understand whether the strength and position of the 
enemy (not of Jackson's force) was competent evidence for me 
to produce in reply to a charge — the charge must be known. It 
was this : That I was ordered to attack Jackson''s flank, that I 
disobeyed and thus prevented the defeat and capture of Jack- 



16 

son's army. My offer is to prove that Jackson's flank was 
not where Pope thought it was, nor where my force could reach 
it ; that another force than Jackson's, more than double my 
numbers, Avas posted in strong position between me and Jack- 
son, and if I had attacked it, I would have ensured my own de- 
feat and capture and that, probably, of Pope's whole army— that 
I knew this at the time — that I knew it at the trial but could 
not prove it — but can prove it now. 

Referring to me you say "what business tras it to him 
whether he was cut to pieces or not?" Often it may be 
no business to an officer whether he is cut to pieces or 
not. But w^hen he is ordered to fall on the flank of one 
corps of the enemy, in order to insure its defeat or capture, 
and he cannot fall on it and defeat and capture it — it is his 
business, not to be cut to pieces in falling on another much 
larger body of the enemy which he was not ordered to attack, 
and which if he did attack, must have defeated and captured 
him, and the army of the general giving the order. Do I 
not prove I am not guilty, in not doing u^hat I sJiould not 
and could not have done. Sui-ely I sweep away by such proof 
every atom, of the charge, as you will see if you study it, and 
leave nothiny for the sentence to stand on. 

You quote " as true facts in the case," the assertion of Lee's 
Engineer-in-Chief (who is he ?) that Longstreet's command was 
not on the field until the morning of the 30th August, the 
day after I was confronted by his whole force — when Long- 
street's own letter to sustain my assertion of his presence on 
the 29th was lying on your desk at the time you made it I 
must suppose this fact, as useful to me as it is damaging to 
Gen, Pope, Avas unintentionally overlooked by you. 

My conviction and sentence Avere based, it is assumed, upon 
the evidence produced before the court, but the public import-- 
ance of the conviction and the vindication of the magnitude of 
the sentence Avere based lai-gely uj)on the supposed infinite 
damage my conduct had occasioned. How largely the court 
was influenced by these as sumptions I need only refer to Mr. 
Holt's revicAV. 

All just men Avill agree that it Avill not do to use and laud 
" rebel testimony" against me — as in the quotations from Gen. 



17 

J. E. B. Stuart — while the carefully considered and particu- 
larly stated evidence in my favor made by Generals Longstreet, 
Wilcox and others, is discarded. 

The report of Stuart to his commander of dragging bushes 
to deceive our troops is true no doubt ; but the evidence is 
within your reach to-day, was, when you spoke in the Senate, 
that the whole of Longstreet's corps of 27,000 men, was 
also in front of my command of less than 11,000 men. 

You dwell on my " animus." So did Judge-Advocate Holt, 
and it was his chief argument, to prove the alleged facts ! He 
meant that I was ill-disposed to Gen. Pope and well-disposed to 
Gen. McClellan, and wished to see Pope fail and McClellan put 
in command. That animus, or state of mind — to convict me of 
acts and deeds — he tries to show from certain selected telegrams 
I sent to certain officers. Do you know that those officers — as 
zealous patriots as breathe — saw nothing in them wrong, no dis- 
affection, no spirit of disobedience, only an anxious concern for 
the public intei'est, and an anxious distruvSt of Pope's capacity 
to command the army. Do you know their acciiracy Avas veri- 
fied ? ■ Do you know that Mr. Lincoln thanked me warmly for 
those very telegrams ? If they are evidence in the case it is evi- 
dence in my favor ; and sui*ely the argument of bad motive is 
silenced, when I disprove every alleged fact. 

When I am heard — as I shall b e sooner or later — I shall 
show, by original despatches written by me on the field to offi- 
cers of my corps, that I dii*ected the execution of Gen, 
Pope's orders with promptness and vigor. Most of these dis- 
patches have come into my possession since the trial; they will 
be substantiated as originals, by officers of high rank and posi- 
tion who received them. They will close the mouths of honest 
men against my alleged " animus " toward Gen. Pope. 

The final point of your speech is as follows : 

" There is one other point to which I wish to'allude. During 
"this very trial, during the very pendency of the trial, Fitz 
" John Porter said in the presence of my informant, who is a 
" man that most of you know, and who is to-day in the em- 
" ployment of Congress, and whose word I would take as soon 
" as I would most men's — though I told him I would not use 
3 



18 

" his name, but I will give his sworn testimony, taken down 
" within two rainiites after the utterance was made — Fitz John 
" Porter said in his presence ' I was not true to Pope, and 
" there's no use in denying it.' " 

To me, such evidence seems scarcely worthy of notice — for 
the person that makes a statement, which, if true, is so damn- 
ino- in its character, and then begs the concealment of his 
name, is not worthy of recognition by men. That as pre- 
sented by you it had any effect upon the minds of Sena- 
tors, I cannot conceive — many of them being lawyers, Avho 
know that such evidence would not be admitted before 
any tribunal. My reply to you, sir, is that the statement 
by whomsoever made and however testified to, is false in 
every particular. Aside from my general character for reti- 
cence when in the army, I certainly liad no inducement to lose 
my senses pending my trial, and falsely assert in any one's pre- 
sence just what General Pope was forty-five days endeavoring 
to prove. Where was this reliable witness then V Why did he 
not then and there testify to my confessed guilt ? What re- / 
strained him for all these years, and Avhy does he now recollect 
or produce evidence, which, if credible, would long ago have 
ended my appeal? I am ashamed to ofier, to be compelled to 
offer an argument against assertions so palpably contrived and 
so wholly unsustained by j^robabilities — so wholly at variance 
with my whole life and conduct. 

You say that after a careful investigation for forty-five days, 
the court iinaniniously rendered a verdict against me. This 
may have been so, but you cannot know it unless some mem- 
ber has violated his oath " not to discover or disclose that vote 
unless required to give evidence thereof, (which has not been 
done) before a court of justice, in due course of law." But if 
true, the question is not what the court did decide, but what 
would be now decided with the new evidence I have to pre- 
sent — and you must know that the decision of that court does 
not affect the justice of my demand that the new evidence 
shall be heard in my defence. 

And let me here say, that on my first appeal to the President, 
Gen. Grant (then at the head of the army) said to me what all 
fair men will endorse, that if I could prove what I asserted, and 



19 

what my papers indicated, justice required the re-examination, 
and every member of my court should be glad of an oppor- 
tunity to join in my appeal. 

I have made my appeal to the President anew, and now await 
his action as to the appointment of a board of officers to inves- 
tigate my case with all the neio testimony adduceable. What I 
ask requires no opinion from the Administration as to the pro- 
priety or injustice of my conviction. 

I simply ask to be heard. 

Plain and honest minds will look with suspicion upon oppo- 
sition to such a request, especially when the request is made 
by one whose life has been spent as an officer in the service of 
the Government and whose record will not suffer by contrast 
with any of his accusers. Plain and honest people will en- 
quire — do now enquire — why such violent opposition to my 
being heard and to the hearing of all the testimony ? If, as is 
asserted, the re-opening of the case, will only deepen the public 
conviction of the justice of my punishment, why should my 
enemies, and they alone, oppose it ? You know that a divided 
public opinion as to the justice of my conviction is not what 
Gen. Pope and others would like. Why not, then, seize upon 
this opportunity, if Gen. Pope has so clear a case, and fix and 
fasten the stigma forever ? Is it not due to the " truth of 
history" that the justice of my condemnation should be made 
so palpable, that the scores of our most patriotic and most 
learned men with moi'e than half of our leading and influen- 
tial journals will cease their advocacy of my case ? 

Is it not due to Gen. Pope and "the truth of history" 
that so admirable an opportunity as my re-hearing would pre- 
sent, should be made available to show what his real business 
in life was at the time of his Virginia campaign. 

You think that he was sorely misunderstood by the coun- 
try at that time and has been since ; and you re-assert that but 
for me — but for my treasonable conduct — his campaign, that, 
as you state it, had for its mission the relief of McClellan, 
by some fighting, • and a good deal of " fooling," would have 
ended in the capture of Jackson, the destruction of Longstreet 
and the end of tlie war ; — surely, if all this glory was lost to 
Gen. Pope by my conduct, is it just to him to withold the 
facts from an incredulous public ? 



20 

Neither Gen. Pope or others can longer take refuge behind 
the " want of power " to re-open my case — the " bad prece- 
dent " it Avould fix upon the army and the like. The power 
has been found and exercised — the precedent has been fixed and 
rightly too — and to the public view Gen. Pope and all others 
who oppose my simple request " to be heard before a tribunal 
known to be impartial," stand, and ever will stand with the 
suspicion fixed upon them that they shun the re-examination 
because they dare not meet the truth. 

I have endeavored to refer to the main points of your speech 
against me, and, though measurably restricted in my reply, I 
make it with unabated faith in the ultimate justice of my Gov- 
ernment — long delayed as it has been — longer delayed as it 
may be. 

Sustained as I am by hosts of friends, whose hands I have 
never gras^Dcd, but whose hearts and words and pens are active 
in my behalf — sustained by the old and true and tried friends 
who have not turned upon me in adversity — but best sus- 
tained by my ever-present and never-failing faith that a just 
and generous people will not permit my wrongs to go un-re- 
dressed, I shall go on to the end, obtaining my justification 
from the government who owes it to me, or leaving it, if God 
wills it, a legacy for my children to demand and obtain. 

Respectfully, 

FITZ JOHN POPtTER. 



013 702 ^'*^ *■ 



I 



